I agree. You are being polite to Hertzvanrental by saying "there is a {mere} possibility". There is a very high probability that Jesus existed.
Vanrental's against Jesus existence rant merely causes him to loose his credibility as a reasonable spokesperson for atheism.

Wrong, I'm saying for all intents and purposes Jesus didn't exist. If you were to look back at my posts you would see that on many occasions I have dismissed his existence.

Wrong, I'm saying for all intents and purposes Jesus didn't exist. If you were to look back at my posts you would see that on many occasions I have dismissed his existence.

This is funny

I looked at a Christian site and was astonished to note their member's stupidity and delusion in not accepting evolution in favor of creationism.

And I now I look at an Atheist site, and I am equally astonished at their member's stupidity (or is it atheist political partisonship?) - taking heretical positions against the evidence on whether a human named Jesus of Nazereth merely existed.

I am highly skeptical about old historical records, and I am also highly skeptical on scientific models which are not expressly proven (by experimental reproduction) - but to a rationally non deluded person the chances Jesus existed is at least 9/10, just as evolution being a true theory is at least 9.5/10.

By the way you fucking miss quoted me - you altered my fucking quote with your own bullshit. Isn't that against some fucking rule of this site.

I'm done hear - to all fuck off!!!!

jizz on a cop, you dumb cunt, you got found out real early, n'est pas? That's the problem with you christards. You are so fuckin' dumb. And, for the record, twat, I added grammatical corrections to your ramblings but I didn't misquote. The evidence is there for all to see.

By the way, unless you have been a member here in the past, how would you know about the site rule against changing quotes?